Universal Access To All Knowledge
Home Donate | Store | Blog | FAQ | Jobs | Volunteer Positions | Contact | Bios | Forums | Projects | Terms, Privacy, & Copyright
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload

Reply to this post | See parent post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: Cliff Hucker Date: Aug 17, 2010 12:16pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: The Grateful Dead peak in 89-90...as per Bobby

Guess we know when you got on the bus, LOL!

Your posts never fail to entertain...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: smokinchains Date: Aug 17, 2010 1:08pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: The Grateful Dead peak in 89-90...as per Bobby

You gotta look at it from Bob's perspective. It's not "he's a jerk, go listen to '73". Think about it. JG was almost dead in '86. They come back in '87 and hit the big time with Touch, although maybe musically they weren't quite there yet. In '89-90 Bob feels that they found their stride after the coma, were more successful commercially than they ever were before, living more comfortably but still doing things their way.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: grendelschoice Date: Aug 17, 2010 1:50pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: The Grateful Dead peak in 89-90...as per Bobby

"Peak" is kind of misleading as a term.

Every Deadhead has his/her feeling on when the band hit its high point and then dropped off. For some, it's not a day past 1969, and for others (like me) the ultimate high point year is 1977, and no one's ever going to convince me otherwise.

But if you're looking for "proof" that Weir et al. were indeed doing some VERY good things in 1989-'90, I'd say start with the 3-night run at Alpine Valley, WI. July 17-19th, and end up at the Branford shows at Nassau in 1990.

Hard to argue those weren't outstanding examples of very prime Dead.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: SomeDarkHollow Date: Aug 17, 2010 1:58pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: The Grateful Dead peak in 89-90...as per Bobby

Agree that folks around here are pretty much set on their opinions on the band's "peaks" and nothing will shake them. I just wish folks would stop inferring those who don't share their opinion are somehow mentally lacking. Hell, if it's a "peak" to you, than a "peak" it is.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: grendelschoice Date: Aug 17, 2010 2:01pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: The Grateful Dead peak in 89-90...as per Bobby

couldn't agree more, sir. (Nice to hear from you again, btw...I've been MIA from the board for a while...no real reason....just haven;t felt much like commenting...) but I do think it's crazy to suggest a person is "wrong" about something as subjective as a particualr Dead year or era....part of what makes the band so interesting is that they sound quite different at different times...songs they did in the Keith era (you make like his acoustic sound better than Brent's Hammond B3) sound very different in the Brent era, etc.

The only thing i think we CAN say for sure is that 1995 sucked serious ass ;-)

(Oh, and 1977 is still the best! ;-)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: SomeDarkHollow Date: Aug 17, 2010 2:06pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: The Grateful Dead peak in 89-90...as per Bobby

If only Jerry had actually had enough energy to suck ass.